Re: [PATCH 6/8] i386: bitops: Don't mark memory as clobbered unnecessarily

> Yes, but _that_ address (of the bit-string) is protected already -- by the
> implicit memory barrier due to the LOCK prefix.

Compiler barrier != CPU barrier.

The memory clobber is a compiler barrier that prevents its global optimizer
from moving memory references. The CPU memory ordering guarantees are completely 
independent from this.


> We shouldn't really be 
> caring about any other memory addresses, so it doesn't affect the
> correctness of the bitops API at all.

The problem is the relationship to other operations.

This is not theoretic and we have had bugs because of this.

-Andi

 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH 6/8] i386: bitops: Don't mark memory as clobbered unnecessarily
    • From: Satyam Sharma <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH 0/8] i386: bitops: Cleanup, sanitize, optimize
    • From: Satyam Sharma <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 6/8] i386: bitops: Don't mark memory as clobbered unnecessarily
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 6/8] i386: bitops: Don't mark memory as clobbered unnecessarily
    • From: Satyam Sharma <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] release quicklist before free_page
• Next by Date: [PATCH] 0 -> NULL, drivers/usb/gadget/
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 6/8] i386: bitops: Don't mark memory as clobbered unnecessarily
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 6/8] i386: bitops: Don't mark memory as clobbered unnecessarily
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]